Art style=FAIL

I disagree.  I'd much rather have the game be fun than looking phenomenal.  Who cares if I can count the number of hairs on a spider's butt if I get bored 10 minutes into the game?

Actually I think the art style is VERY COOL and eagerly look forward to playing it.

It kind of reminds me of the old D&D art work and that has always brought a smile to my face. I first played MoM in 2002 and still play it on an on/off bases even today as do many people I know, so I really don't think that too many people think of graphics first.

That said the graphics on that page are slightly outdated, you might want to check this thread to see a more current standard of the graphics: https://forums.elementalgame.com/358044.

Some of those screenshots are old but the first few give a better idea of the current standard of the engine.

False dichotomy fallacy.

Also even if this is the set style of the game it should have more details, that's just being lazy.

I'll wait till the final game to decide but aren't there quite likely to be a lot of graphic mods?

I am not a fan of what I see either, but I also reserve judgment until I see more. Tha coloring scheme/theme, reminds me a little of Borderlands current style, and I don't care for that either. I don't know what you mean by animations being the only thing to save this game though. I would say great gameplay would do a lot to save any game.

I firmly disagree. I think the highly stylized, dare I say classical fantasy art motif is exceptionally fitting for this title. This is especially so given the foundation the entire enterprise is based on.

It is pre alpha graphic.

But if it is in your opinion bad, it is bad. Don't buy the game, if you can't live with it.

Now for my opinion: You post = FAIL. You cant judge graphic or even art style 8 month before it is ready to be shown off. Maybe come back when it is finalized?

You obviously don't know what a dichotomy is. Brenatevi said that he would rather have the game be fun than looking phenomenal. This does not imply that you can't have both, and therefore there is no dichotomy. (S)he is simply stating that gameplay is MORE important to him/her than graphics.

Personally, I love the direction of the artwork, and I don't think it is cartoony at all. There is also a post on this where they show the artwork of the artist that they are inspired by, and they are doing an incredib;e job even at this stage to capture his style.

Did we really need a second thread for this?

And for the record, lots of people like a more "cartoony" unrealistic style. "Realistic" graphics have this nasty habit of looking awful on non top-end hardware, or using a style like in most shooters that everything is some shade of brown.

Fail to you.

Those are really early alpha screenshots.  They are nowhere near indicative of final quality.

Why is it that people seem to assume that a game looks great the moment it is first developed?  Read BoogieBac's posts here https://forums.elementalgame.com/358519

I think your post is a bit rude and exaggerated.

Remember, Stardock isn't some nameless faceless corporation that has no contact with its fans like you may be used to.  The people who make this game actually read these boards and interact with the fans.  And they are real people with real feelings.  So its fine to have input on the game, they want to hear it.  But choose your words as if you're talking to real people.

I think your post makes little sense. 

Appealing graphics always have value, but putting aside your opinion of the game's grapics, strategy fans are ususlly willing to play a game regardless of any graphics it has.  They certainly dont care a whit about animations, when most tbs and 4x strategy games have very few if any.

And King's Bounty is a fine game, but it has little to do with E:WOM. They are two entriely different genres of game, and dont neccesarily have the same fanbase.  I think it's possible you may not entirely understand the sort of game E;WOM is going to be.

I'm afraid sir, as others have pointed out, the Fail belongs to you.

You may not like the style but I can assure you that you are wrong in your assumption that your notion is shared with everyone here.

False dichotomy fallacy.

(also it's 2009., not 2004.)

Troll much?

false dichotomy (plural false dichotomies)

1. (logical fallacy) A situation in which two alternative points of views are presented as the only options, whereas others are available.

Again, I do not think that word means what you think it means. If you actually want to make logic arguments and point our fallacies.

Whereas; the graphics suck and      <---- false premise, opinion stated as fact

Whereas; games that do not have outstanding graphics suck, and   <----- see above

Whereas; the other aspect of graphics other than the style is animations, therefore

Be it resolved; that unless the animations are outstanding, this game is destined to suck.

Since two of your three premises are false, your conclusion fails. A lot of people like the graphic style. Even among those who don't there are many if not most people that consider gameplay more important than graphics (not a false dichotomy, learn what phrases mean before you use them).

Your post is covered in FAIL.

I can see both sides to the story. The media section of this website is what is supposed to help sell this game. Graphic wise, what they have is ok at best. I personally like the art direction their going for but you cant blame people because they think it looks like a flash game. I think his concern is valid given the information we have to go off of so far. (EDIT: I dont agree how he worded his post though. He makes alot of assumptions)

I actually played King's bounty last night and couldnt help but wonder if Elemental would be as "visually pleasing." I say "visually pleasing" because you really cant compare the graphics apples to apples. Not only is stardock going for a different art direction it's also a different type of game.

Either way, we just have to hold out and see what the final product looks like. Or part of the final product...Alpha in 2 days! YAHOO! *Crosses fingers*

I personally adore the graphic style.  It's a breath of fresh air.  Many games use the same tried and proven style. I'm glad Stardock is going in a different direction.  Also, these graphics make it easier to run on any system, which is something that I definitely approve of.

Lastly, if the graphics engine requires less effort from the developers, they can spend more effort on the gameplay.  Take Dominions 3, for example.  That game has very dated graphics, but it is one of the deepest and long lasting games that I have ever played.

1. art
2. animations

There is nothing else. And because his opinion is law and if you disagree and dare to give an argument you are only stating a "False dichotomy fallacy.".

So I won't bother countering all the post (nothing can be saved from a non subjective point of view) and will keep this simple: Hortz = FAIL

Feel free to disagree, I don't care.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, your personal likes and dislikes are not the definition of good and bad.

I happen to like the stylized approach to graphics for this type of game!  There is nothing more annoying that having to mouse over every single tile simply because the graphics are so complex and detailed that I can't tell at a glance what the terrain type, improvments, and other 'fun' on the tile means.  Sure, it looks good, but it gets in the fucking way.

Besides, the way they're going looks good in it's own right, even if it is stylized.

Imo, art quality IS underrated in strategy games.  I thought that GalCivII would've been epic (as opposed to just really really good) with less cartoony art.  However, if Elemental lives up to the concept art in some of the forum posts, it should be artistically innovative (for a video game) and visually stunning.

Though perhaps updating the media section with more of the art seen in the forums in the relatively near future would help avoid more misinformed, unfairly judgmental posts like this one...

So cool! We found where the troll lives.

Um, the art was hardly 'cartooney' in GC2...

Can't mods lock/delete threads?